What speakers can b considered as world reference?

Since MBL seems to depart from most other designs as far as being omni, what are people's opinions of MBL's?

I think Omni or dipoles are similar. They will load the room more evenly and you can achieve a natural sound with cheaper drivers in a dipole....but too much reverberation can be bad and if you place these close to a rear wall then it may ruin the imaging or even risk sounding claustrophobic or cluttered. Like panels these designs should be brought well out into a room and will work best in a large room. Dipoles work great in movie theatres....especially for surrounds.

In response to Drew

>I've never been to a concert where an orchestra or choir used any sort of amplification. I've also heard unamplified small jazz ensembles and soloists playing classical guitar, sax, piano, hammer dulcimer, harp, violin, viola, cello, accordion, etc.

Thats why I said in my previous post"(except for classical and intimate jazz of course, where there is no PA system)" If those are the types of music you listen to then "live" is just the musicians and their instruments. My post was entirely refering to most concerts that people go to. I think I've been to maybe one concert in my life that didn't have a PA system, and that was the Cleveland Orchestra. ALmost everybody else uses amplification. (in Cleveland) These are the likes of Coldplay, Rush, U2, Phill Collins, Sarah Mclaclahn, Norah Jones, Police, Trans Siberian Orchestra, Enya, AC/DC, Metallica, Joe Satriani and the list goes on forever. I will say, we don't get many intimate artsy jazz clubs or the like around here, (though I wish we did) but for most music there is a PA in a large scale venue with about 35,000 people there. I have even seen the singing angels around christmas time also, and guess what? Sound reinforcement. Even small bars/clubs have sound reinforcement like 99% of the time. Otherwise the drummer and guitarist will drown out the singer. They have to have it.

So I think we are sort of saying the same thing, but from different paradigms. I would agree that "live" sound if defined as intimate jazz or orchestra with out the aid of a PA can sound really good, especially if you are sitting in the "sweet" spot. In that case I could see that you might want to try to arrange an audio system that you could close your eyes and feel like you are there. My original post was geared for the majority of live concerts that are not that acoustically superior, are played in big echoey venues at incredible volumes. Lots of noise, the bass hits you like a minute after the treble, and depending where you are sitting, you could be getting all left channel or all right channel. THis was why I was confused as to why so many people want to replicate "live" sound. I think it sounds like a good theory in their minds, but when it comes down to it... it isn't.

Lets face it, when you go see Rush (or any other large venue players) live, and you close your eyes, there is no way to tell where the musicians are in the acoustic space, there is very little soundstaging, and imaging. They are also not necesarily at their best that night, and they make mistakes! I heard Eric Johnson live, and he was having some trouble hearing himself, and it sounded way off. But his CD sounds fabulous. This kind of live I would never want to duplicate. That was my point.

In response to the more recent MBL discussion, I think they are amazing. I've heard them and they are amazing. Spooky.

T Bone nailed this one on the head!

Shindo Latour field coil. But I would not demean these by calling them "world" reference. They are Universal Reference, IMHO.

Bose?? I just threw up a little in my mouth. :) It's funny as a hifi salesman, I get people of all sorts comming in to listen. One moment sticks out in my mind. We had a $15,000 pair of class A uberspeakers on display for demo hooked up with reference level electronics, and a customer came in with his girlfriend and listened to them. Without flinching he got up and said with a proud and slightly arrogant flair, "I'm more of a Bose kind of guy". I think it was to look good in front of his girlfriend thinking that he had the inside track on what true hifi was all about, and that he was more of a connesueir of fine high end products. We laughed for quite some time after he left.

It is amazing to me how good of a job Bose has done on advertising. They could tell people the sky was actually red, and I think a large percentage of people would believe it! The 901's were the only O.K. speaker that Bose made. In their time they were decent I suppose (not now), but most peoples ideas of Bose are the acoustimass 2" paper woofered little cubes that they now sell like double cheesburgers from McDonalds. It all comes from how much have you been exposed to, and how far have you really gotten into it. People come in all the time and ask for Bose, but it is only because they don't know any better. They've been baraged with commercials so much telling them that Bose is the best, that they just end up believing them. It's our job to educate them.

P.S. I have spoke with a Bose engineer at an audio convention. He said his major design constraint when engineering the Bose cubes was how to get decent sound pressure for a $4 manufacturing cost. $4!!! How did you think they got that huge advertising budget?